Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—The petitioner possess a fire-arm license No. 8816 whereupon an entry of Gun No. S.B.B.L.10718 exist. It has been alleged that a Criminal case being Case Crime No. 400/07 under Sections 307 and 504 I.P.C. was registered against the petitioner. The aforesaid license was suspened on 31st July, 2007. The order of suspension besides mentioning the factum of registration of the aforesaid criminal case further stated that petitioner used aforesaid gun in the crime which was recovered by the local police and the petitioner could not show his gun, when required. Hence another case No. 401 of 2007 under Sections 25 and 30 Arms Act was also registered. On the recommendation of the Station Incharge, which was approved by Senior Superintendent of Police, Aligarh, Additional District Magistrate suspended arm license vide order dated 31st July, 2007 and thereafter passed final order on 8th July, 2008 cancelling the said license. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 18 of Arms Act on 8th August, 2008 which has been rejected on 5.5.2010.

2. During pendency of the appeal, Criminal case under Sections 307 and 504 I.P.C. was decided vide judgment dated 17th June, 2009 wherein the petitioner was not only acquitted but the trial Court also directed for registration of a case under Section 182 I.P.C. against Bani Singh PW-2 for lodging a false report against the petitioner.

3. This fact was brought to the notice of Commissioner, Aligarh but ignoring the same, observing that license was cancelled in order to maintain law and order on the recommendation of Senior Superintendent of Police, Commissioner rejected the appeal by order dated 5th May, 2010 and confirmed order of cancellation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appellate order is clearly arbitrary, based on conjecture and surmises and therefore deserve to be set aside.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Initially the case of respondents appears to be that the petitioner had used the aforesaid licensed gun in a crime pertaining whereto case crime No. 400 of 2007 under Sections 307 and 504 IPC was registered on 23.5.2007. The use of gun in the aforesaid crime is said to be proved by alleging that the firearm was recovered by local police. Thereafter the respondents proceeded further to allege that petitioner was required to show his gun but failed hence another case No. 401/2007 under Sections 25 and 30 Arms Act was registered. On account of these two matters, the Station Incharge appears to have submitted a report recommending cancellation of arm license of the petitioner, which was approved by Senior Superintendent of Police, Aligarh and the two orders impugned in this writ petition were passed.

7. The Criminal case has not only resulted in honourable acquittal of petitioner but the trial Court has recorded a finding of fact that report was lodged falsely against petitioner and thus proceedings under Section 182 IPC should be initiated against the complainant.

8. That being so, in absence of any order setting aside the above findings recorded by trial Court, this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the aforesaid entire criminal proceedings initiated against petitioner were fictitious and had no substance at all. This also belied the allegation contained in the suspension order that the firearm was recovered by local police though this fact has not been proved or found correct by the trial Court.

9. Learned Standing Counsel also could not tell, when the fire-arm was already recovered by the police, as mentioned in the order of suspension, then where was an occasion to the petitioner thereafter to show his firearm to the police on demand and how proceedings under Sections 25 and 30 Arms Act could be made out. It appears that Commissioner in deciding the appeal though confronted with the judgment of trial Court but chose to proceed with the report of Senior Superintendent of Police re